Mitchz95

I can confirm this, at least on my end. I raised the setting above zero and now I can EVA again.

Happening to me as well. It worked fine for my first orbital and Mun mission, but now for some reason it just doesn't work at all on any vessel, even when I start a new campaign.

KSP Version - 0.1.0.0.20892 Translation error location - Tracking Station and Map View English Error - All celestial bodies are labelled "Terrestrial Planet", including Jool (a gas giant), Kerbol (a star), and all moons. Your Language Correction - Jool should be labelled "Gas Giant", Kerbol should be labelled "Star", and all moons should be labelled "Terrestrial Moon". Notes / Screenshots - KSP Version - 0.1.0.0.20892 Translation error location - Kerbal Space Center English Error - The Tracking Station description says "You can also recovered lander vessels and crew." Your Language Correction - "Lander" should be "landed". Notes / Screenshots -

obligatory Uranus joke Nice to see the ice giants getting some attention. Would Starship be able to reduce the Uranus Orbiter's travel time?

Good news, everyone!

Any chance of them appealing it further? Can they?

I do love the idea of visiting a rogue planet. It would be completely dark, so the only illumination would be whatever lights you brought on your ship. Very spooky.

747 launches in the next ten years? More likely than you think! (Highly speculative of course, but the rationale seems solid to me.)

Couldn't they just make it a moon of the gas giant and match its orbital period around the planet to the planet's period around its sun? And maybe make the gas giant low-mass and low-density to justify the L2 point being so close.

Planet Nine, not Planet X. Planet Nine is a hypothetical super-Earth (or Mini-Neptune) in the outer solar system that could be responsible for the clustering of certain TNOs. Its existence was first proposed in 2016.

Webb, if only so we can stop poking fun at the endless delays. Also because it might finally find Planet Nine, if it exists. Also, I love that names like Very Large Telescope and Overwhelmingly Large Telescope are an accepted naming convention for these things.

I'm fond of two-word ship names, like Glorious Heritage or Venture Star. Will have to see what feels appropriate at the time. I do like Nomad, suggested earlier. Depending on how my game plays out, I may end up naming it after a deceased Kerbal.

How do I do this? There are five quicksave files, all of them from after the glitch. No persistents.

All I see are "persistent" and "quicksave".

My game glitched while timewarping and two of my on-mission Kerbals somehow got marked as MIA. I'm trying to bring them back via save file editing (marking them as "Assigned" rather than "Missing" in the roster, and correcting the mission's crew count to 3) but it doesn't seem to be working. Is there anything else I can do? The mission is kinda screwed without them.

Already has a thread, but yeah, RIP.

Another excellent deep dive from Apogee:

To be fair, combat in the Star Wars universe never made sense to begin with. They have target-tracking missiles, and yet starfighters still dogfight like it's the 1940s. Sheer pilot attrition should have brought down the Rebellion within a year. They have space battleships that can depopulate planets within days, and yet they hardly ever use orbital bombardment to force a surrender. Often they'll deploy pitifully small ground forces that have next to no air support. And worst of all, no matter how many times the above blows up in their faces, they go right back to their old habits as soon as the dust settles. Death Star got blown up? Build another one three times bigger. I love Star Wars, but like all space opera, it runs on rule of cool realistic physics and tactics. That's not a bad thing, it's just the nature of the genre.

TIL there's a Dragon XL. I just assumed Starship would be taking over for lunar missions.

Those seagulls will never know how lucky they were...

"Inspections showed the core stage hardware, including its engines, and the B-2 test stand are in excellent condition after the first hot fire test, and no major repairs are needed to prepare for a second hot fire test" How do you go from MCF (major component failure) to "no repairs needed"? Am I misunderstanding the term? And wasn't the original test supposed to run for six minutes? Why down to four now?

Technically, it orbits one star in a trinary system. Much like Vulcan. Still, very cool! I wonder how its orbit got so inclined.